"Kevin Grittner" <kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov> writes:
> "Kevin Grittner" <kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov> wrote:
>> I'm working on getting all of our triggers to behave with Tom's v8
>> patch for bug 6123 and hope to be able to post a positive result
>> tomorrow. I think this is considered a bug and still subject to
>> inclusion, but it doesn't really cause my shop any pain if it is
>> bumped to 9.3. In other words, I don't think this is a blocker.
> Testing has run into problems, the cause of which is not immediately
> obvious. I think we should bump this to 9.3. Our shop has a
> workaround which isn't drawing any complaints here, and the issue
> has been around forever in its current form. I'm not even sure we
> won't need more discussion on what constitutes correct behavior once
> I track things down.
Agreed. Even if we were entirely happy with the design of the patch
(which, from the previous discussion, we weren't 100%) and your testing
gave it a clean bill of health, it's uncomfortable to be pushing such a
change into 9.2 post-beta --- it might invalidate other peoples'
application compatibility checking, which I'm sure people have started
doing using the betas. Punting to 9.3 seems like the thing to do.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
